mack wrote:[color=blue]
> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:dYY8h.6122$ya1.2194@news02.roc.ny...[color=green]
>> "Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
>> news:4vk8m25pl0e0n9o5kbu2ot8t2lhv56rflk@4ax.com...[color=darkred]
>>> Libs hate the US Military, even though they are alive only because we
>>> have a strong Military.
>>>
>>> The charge that our military is lowering their standards turns out not
>>> to be true...
>>>
>>>
>>> [url]http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda06-09.cfm[/url]
>>>
>>> Overall, the wartime recruits are more similar than dissimilar to
>>> their civilian counterparts. The all-volunteer force displays near
>>> proportional rep*resentation of income backgrounds. Whites serve in
>>> approximate proportion to their population, although representation of
>>> minority groups varies. Recruits must meet educational standards, and
>>> the military provides resources for furthering educa*tion to those who
>>> might not otherwise have the opportunity to attend four-year colleges.
>>> Although rural representation is disproportional, the military offers
>>> the opportunity to gain new skills and enter industries that are not
>>> available in rural areas.[/color]
>>
>> [url]http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/roberts050806.html[/url][/color]
> This sort of says it all.....
>
> Jared scored 43 out of 99 on the Army's basic entrance exam -- 31 is lowest
> grade the Army allows for enlistment, military officials said.
>
> Not lowering standards? Why will the Army allow someone who scores this
> low on an entrance exam enter the service?
> I imagine that next, the service will test applicants by shining a
> flashlight in one ear, and if they can't see the light by looking in the
> other ear, they're IN!
>
>
>[/color]
Yep, it's called a 2nd Lt.
